Re: Mani Varadarajan's comments
From the Bhakti List Archives
• October 3, 1995
Jay.Bharadwaj@nrecatao.nreca.org wrote: * * Regarding assumptions made while quoting Acharyas. For a * Mumukshu (seeker of salvation) questioning an Acharya's statement can only * be with the understanding that the Acharya is self realized and that the * questions are directed towards removing existing dvandva in the Mumukshu's * mind which have been caused by previous sins. Questions that by their * very nature question the motives and integrity of an Acharya does not help * a Mumukshu in his/her quest for salvation. * * * As long as we think that the Acharya is just a mere human subject to * the same fallacies as we are, we will only be like a plane on a taxiway in * Laguardia airport in the middle of a thunderstorm. There will be no * possibility of takeoff. We should look upon our Acharya at least as * representing God's instructions and respect the positions of other * Acharyas. This becomes easy to understand if we accept the fact that the * only one rule common to all Jivatmas is we should do whatever the Single * Almighty God wants us to do.What I am going to say here may not be acceptable to many. Elevating the status of the guru/acharya to that of God is not right. Show me one quote from shruti which says that. Likewise, equating all acharyas to, say, Sri Ramanuja is not acceptable to me. It is downright insulting. I have had the (mis)fortune of seeing Srimad azhagiya singar, the predecessor of the current one (sorry, don't remember the number etc.) in his full fury, blasting an innocent devotee with choice abuses. This was in Sri Rangam, when I had gone to his ashram at about 3:00 p.m. on a hot summer day. I had been reasonably trained in the protocols to be employed but such was not the case with an young man who was waiting there to see this godman. This young man was about 25 years old, a native of Sri Rangam, but had gone to settle down in Bombay as a small child, and had completely lost his roots. He had come back to Sri Rangam to rediscover his roots and perhaps his religion too but little did he expect that he was in for a rude shock. Sri azhagiya singar woke up and his assistant let the two of us in. This young man fell at azhagiya singar's feet and lo and behold, touched his feet - apparently a sin! That was it! azhagiya singar jumped from his seat (at that old age of 80+, I guess) and said certain things which could be roughly translated as "%$$%$%^*( ^*&^#$&**(& *(&(&*(, he touched me &*^*&(()" It reminded me of "angaN NYaalam ancha" of thirumangai aazhvaar except that this young man was no demon and azhagiya singar was no vishnu! That very moment, he was no more my acharya. A man, who can not control his anger is not fit to be my acharya. A man who drove away an innocent devotee rather than leading him to the right path is not fit to carry the mantle of Sri Ramanuja. Unless I see some extraordinary qualities in someone, I will not consider him as my acharya. Sri Ramanuja will be my acharya. If for my "blasphemy" I will have to rot in hell, so be it. I would rather enjoy that. --badri -------------------------------------------------- S.Badrinarayanan Graduate Student Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Cornell University --------------------------------------------------
- Next message: krish: "Re: Mani Varadarajan's comments"
- Previous message: Jay.Bharadwaj_at_nrecatao.nreca.org: "Mani Varadarajan's comments"
- In reply to: Jay.Bharadwaj_at_nrecatao.nreca.org: "Mani Varadarajan's comments"
- Next in thread: krish: "Re: Mani Varadarajan's comments"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]